Article by Jon Holbrook, barrister, on implications of Forstater judgement

[NellieEllie]

Re part of judgement —. “It is worth re-reading this passage in order to appreciate that, so far as the law is concerned, nobody in a democracy should express the political belief that a ‘trans woman is a man’ because it may hurt the man’s feelings”. Great article

www.spiked-online.com/2019/12/23/maya-forstater-a-champion-of-democracy/

I see he's posted it on Twitter and no ones called him a c*nt.

Thanks - great article.

@EverardDigby. Early days, early days...

Very clear and highlights a number of important points.

Good article to share with anyone who isn't that familiar with the issues and doesn't yet understand why this is so relevant to everyone.

Thanks.
I like the term 'Victorian'
Medieval would also suffice.

people cannot expect to be protected if their core belief involves violating others’ dignity and/or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them.

Sure if Maya was deliberately going round with the intention of misgendering trans people at every opportunity, then I could see how that would be hostile and degrading. But she is stating her belief in a fact and the mere fact that she thinks that is hostile and degrading? That is beyond ridiculous. That’s basically thought crime.

people cannot expect to be protected if their core belief involves violating others’ dignity and/or creating an intimidating, hostile, degrading, humiliating or offensive environment for them

Without reading the article I would say that this very clearly says transwomen cannot expect to be protected if their core belief is that they are women as the consequences to this is to create an intimidating, hostile, degrading and humiliating environment for women and girls.

Very good article, thanks for posting.

V good and clear (and true)

I laughed at this choice of words though

'today’s law emasculates democracy by denying people a voice. '

Early days, early days...

Or could it be because he's a man...?

I'm with Birdsfoottrefoil

Thinking about it I'm vegetarian so am protected as protected belief. I have never concluded that I can stop people ridiculing vegetarians or restrict people's speech. I had someone apologising to me for mentioning eating bacon the other day.

Perhaps I'll go nuclear and denounce and sue people for the trauma caused at making me think about the slaughter of animals.

My rights include not being forced to eat meat, or being forced to take part in the slaughter or processing meat. It gives me no rights to impose my deeply held feelings of repugnance etc on others.